Victor Polterovich, Vladimir Popov ACCUMULATION OF FOREX AND LONG TERM ECONOMIC GROWTH

In many countries accumulation of FOREX goes hand in hand with economic growth

But in other countries the relationship between FOREX accumulation and growth is not that obvious...

Russia - accumulation of FOREX and growth

Literature overview Rodrik (1986) developed a model demonstrating how disequilibrium exchange rate in the presence of foreign trade externalities could lead to the acceleration of growth. Rodrik (1986) developed a model demonstrating how disequilibrium exchange rate in the presence of foreign trade externalities could lead to the acceleration of growth. In this early paper Rodrik assumes the import externality, which is used via the overvaluation of the exchange rate that stimulates imports of machinery and equipment. In this early paper Rodrik assumes the import externality, which is used via the overvaluation of the exchange rate that stimulates imports of machinery and equipment. It was shown for developing countries that overvaluation of the exchange rate is detrimental for economic growth by including the variable that characterizes the undervaluation of the exchange rate into standard growth regressions (Dollar, 1992; Easterly, 1999). It was shown for developing countries that overvaluation of the exchange rate is detrimental for economic growth by including the variable that characterizes the undervaluation of the exchange rate into standard growth regressions (Dollar, 1992; Easterly, 1999). Aghion, Bacchetta, Ranciere, Rogoff (2006) examine mainly the impact of volatility of the real exchange rate on productivity growth, but also look at the impact on growth of under/overvaluation of the exchange rate (the measure of overvaluation is basically the residual from the regression of RER on the GDP per capita – to control for the Balassa- Samuelson effect – and a couple of regional dummies. They find that overvaluation of RER negatively affects economic growth, especially in poorer countries. Aghion, Bacchetta, Ranciere, Rogoff (2006) examine mainly the impact of volatility of the real exchange rate on productivity growth, but also look at the impact on growth of under/overvaluation of the exchange rate (the measure of overvaluation is basically the residual from the regression of RER on the GDP per capita – to control for the Balassa- Samuelson effect – and a couple of regional dummies. They find that overvaluation of RER negatively affects economic growth, especially in poorer countries.

Literature overview: Balassa- Samuelson effect Grafe and Wyplosz (1997) argue that even if the appreciation of the exchange rate in transition economies undermines business profits (in the export sector and in industries that compete with imports), this should not necessarily lead to a deterioration of the current account, since the need for capital accumulation in transition economies declines - that is, they can operate with lower savings ratios than they could before the transition. Grafe and Wyplosz (1997) argue that even if the appreciation of the exchange rate in transition economies undermines business profits (in the export sector and in industries that compete with imports), this should not necessarily lead to a deterioration of the current account, since the need for capital accumulation in transition economies declines - that is, they can operate with lower savings ratios than they could before the transition. Halpern and Wyplosz (1997) argue that real appreciation in transition economies will continue until the transition is over, which may be “decades away.” Halpern and Wyplosz (1997) argue that real appreciation in transition economies will continue until the transition is over, which may be “decades away.” Another study (ESE, 2001) found evidence of Balassa- Samuelson effect in transition economies of Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union in the 1990s. The period is too short, however, and the increases in RER that actually took place in most transition economies may be the reaction to the overshooting initial devaluations that occurred in the beginning of the 1990s, when convertibility was introduced. Another study (ESE, 2001) found evidence of Balassa- Samuelson effect in transition economies of Eastern Europe and former Soviet Union in the 1990s. The period is too short, however, and the increases in RER that actually took place in most transition economies may be the reaction to the overshooting initial devaluations that occurred in the beginning of the 1990s, when convertibility was introduced.

Balassa-Samuelson effect: real exchange rate (national prices for non-tradables as compared to foreign prices) increase with the growth of GDP per capita

Real exchange rate of national currencies versus the US dollar for major groups of countries

How the accumulation of FOREX is financed? Formally, the following identities hold: Formally, the following identities hold: ΔM=ΔFOREX+ΔB CB ΔM=ΔFOREX+ΔB CB BD = ΔB CB + ΔB P BD = ΔB CB + ΔB P ΔFOREX = ΔM + BS + ΔB P, ΔFOREX = ΔM + BS + ΔB P, where ΔFOREX – increase in foreign exchange reserves, where ΔFOREX – increase in foreign exchange reserves, ΔM – increase in money supply, ΔM – increase in money supply, BS – budget surplus (BD – budget deficit), BS – budget surplus (BD – budget deficit), ΔB P – increase in bonds held by the public, ΔB P – increase in bonds held by the public, ΔB CB - increase in bonds held by the central bank. ΔB CB - increase in bonds held by the central bank. The last identity implies that the increase in foreign exchange reserves can be financed by the increase in money supply, i.e. inflation tax on everyone (ΔM), budget surplus (BS), accumulation of debt held by the public (ΔB P ).22 The last identity implies that the increase in foreign exchange reserves can be financed by the increase in money supply, i.e. inflation tax on everyone (ΔM), budget surplus (BS), accumulation of debt held by the public (ΔB P ).22

How the accumulation of FOREX is financed?

Why a country keeps FOREX? The standard formula for explaining FER is: The standard formula for explaining FER is:, where, where Y is income, Y is income, O is the measure of openness of the economy (external trade to GDP ratio), O is the measure of openness of the economy (external trade to GDP ratio), is the volatility of openness, is the volatility of openness, i is the opportunity costs of holding foreign exchange reserves (difference between the interest rate earned on FER invested into short- term low risk securities and interest rate on alternative investment). i is the opportunity costs of holding foreign exchange reserves (difference between the interest rate earned on FER invested into short- term low risk securities and interest rate on alternative investment). The collapse of the Bretton-Woods fixed exchange rates system in 1971 did not have a large impact on the demand for FER (Grennes, 1984, Ch. 22). The collapse of the Bretton-Woods fixed exchange rates system in 1971 did not have a large impact on the demand for FER (Grennes, 1984, Ch. 22).

What are the determinants of the accumulation of FOREX? delta R = 38 – 11.4logYcap (T/Y) (delta T/Y) delta R = 38 – 11.4logYcap (T/Y) (delta T/Y) (R 2 =34%, N=82, all coefficients significant at 0.1% level). Then we considered the residual as the policy- induced change in reserves. Then we considered the residual as the policy- induced change in reserves. Afterwards we used the policy induced change in foreign exchange reserves as one of the explanatory variables in growth regressions together with import taxes and change in government revenues/GDP ratio Afterwards we used the policy induced change in foreign exchange reserves as one of the explanatory variables in growth regressions together with import taxes and change in government revenues/GDP ratio

Does policy induced FOREX accumulation influence growth? GROWTH= CONST.+CONTR.VAR.+ T(0.06– Ycap75us)+ Rpol ( T) GROWTH= CONST.+CONTR.VAR.+ T(0.06– Ycap75us)+ Rpol ( T) The control variables are the rule of law index for 2001, the size of the economy in 1975, and the population growth rates in The control variables are the rule of law index for 2001, the size of the economy in 1975, and the population growth rates in N=74, R2=44%, all coefficients are significant at less than 10% level, except for coefficients of Rpol (11%) and the PPP GDP in 1975 (16%). N=74, R2=44%, all coefficients are significant at less than 10% level, except for coefficients of Rpol (11%) and the PPP GDP in 1975 (16%).

What determines the accumulation of FOREX? Another definition of policy-induced changes in FOREX We also experimented with another definition of policy induced change in foreign exchange reserves, as a residual from regression linking the increase in reserves to GDP ratio to the following ratios: trade/GDP, increase in trade/GDP, external debt/GDP(ED/Y) and debt service/GDP(DS/Y): N=59, R 2 =36%, all coefficients significant at less than 7%.

Does policy induced FOREX accumulation influence growth? GROWTH=CONST.+CONTR.VAR.+T(0.001RISK– Ycap75us)+Rpol( T), N=48, R 2 = 46, all coefficients significant at 7% or less, control variables – PPP GDP per capita in 1975 and population growth rate.

What are the determinants of the accumulation of FOREX? Another definition of policy-induced changes in FOREX For the period, for which more data are available, the best equation explaining changes in FER is shown below: For the period, for which more data are available, the best equation explaining changes in FER is shown below: (1) (1) R 2 =50%, N=72, all coefficients significant at 3% level or less, where: Y - initial (1975) GDP per capita, Y - initial (1975) GDP per capita, T/Y - average ratio of foreign trade to GDP over the period, T/Y - average ratio of foreign trade to GDP over the period, - the increase in the same ratio over the period, - the increase in the same ratio over the period, R/Y average ratio of FER to GDP in , R/Y average ratio of FER to GDP in , ICI average investment climate index in (ranges from 0 to 100, the higher, the better). ICI average investment climate index in (ranges from 0 to 100, the higher, the better).

Does policy induced FOREX accumulation influence growth? GROWTH = CONST. + CONTR. VAR. + GROWTH = CONST. + CONTR. VAR. + Rpol (0.10 – Ycap75us) Rpol (0.10 – Ycap75us) R2 = 56, N=70, all variables are significant at 10% level or less, R2 = 56, N=70, all variables are significant at 10% level or less, where Ycap75us – PPP GDP per capita in 1975 as a % of the US level. where Ycap75us – PPP GDP per capita in 1975 as a % of the US level. It turns out that there is a threshold level of GDP per capita in 1975 – about 67% of the US level: countries below this level could stimulate growth via accumulation of FER in excess of objective needs, whereas for richer countries the impact of FER accumulation was negative It turns out that there is a threshold level of GDP per capita in 1975 – about 67% of the US level: countries below this level could stimulate growth via accumulation of FER in excess of objective needs, whereas for richer countries the impact of FER accumulation was negative

Does policy induced FOREX accumulation influence growth?

Countries with faster accumulation of FOREX had lower real exchange rates

Investment/GDP ratio and export/GDP ratio

Accumulation of FOREX and FDI

Real exchange rate in fast growing developing countries

The model